this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2024
176 points (86.7% liked)

Asklemmy

43893 readers
830 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
176
What else can be done to defeat Trump in November other than just telling people "vote"? (self.asklemmy)
submitted 4 months ago by return2ozma to c/[email protected]
133 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (3 children)

https://www.supremecourt.gov

Transcripts are posted after rulings.

Or you could just read one of the many, many, many articles quoting her dissent.

Or watch a video quoting her.

https://youtu.be/IOyItzldEBM?si=7qSrhX1P6npUdj0b

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You could at least make it easy and post a link to the pdf

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Like you read it regardless.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Not all of it, obviously. But if you want someone else to, you should consider not making them search through a different website to try to find it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

It's on the landing page, in the third "recent rulings" that helpfully even has Trump in the name, but go on.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The standard for citations has been established a long time and there’s no good reason to change it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Lol

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Oh that’s right you have no idea what I’m referring to. My bad.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

LOL

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I can understand how a person with no ability to articulate things wouldn’t grok or appreciate good citation design.

Ooh wait here we go:

LoL

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Said the guy "groking" things

🤣

[–] disguy_ovahea 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You’re absolutely correct. This is the part that has been left out of every news article I’ve read, and is undoubtedly the most concerning:

And some Presidential conduct-for example, speaking to and on behalf of the American people, see Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U. S. 667, 701 (2018) - certainly can qualify as official even when not obviously connected to a particular constitutional or statutory provision. For those reasons, the immunity we have recognized extends to the "outer perimeter" of the President's official responsibilities, covering actions so long as they are "not manifestly or palpably beyond [his] authority."

So it’s not just acts committed by the President, but also ordered by the President.

It’s also vague enough that charges can get bounced around lower courts indefinitely.

Thank you again for the link. I didn’t see it when I first searched.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

It’s also vague enough that charges can get bounced around lower courts indefinitely.

Yup! It will be the 5th circuit almost certainly. It's the Republican rubber stamp circuit...